Actually i recall them saying registration machines were hack not voting machines

So more inconsistencies, then. They can't even get it straight what Russia did.

Quote

Also to me the most damming evidence was a Russian new orgnazatin (who a propagans machine) reporting on something in wikileaks BEFORE wikileaks

A lot of stuff like Hillary rigging the primaries or talking to Goldman Sachs were speculations long before wikileaks verified. There was also video footage of Hillary's people giving journalists questions beforehand or debate officials handing shit to Hillary, which was again verified by wikileaks later. Wikileaks was not the first to report most of their stuff. They were just the ones who could verify it.

Quote

Yes assange said rhat but also suggesting she murdered dnc guy, with no proof or if he was even an informent. To the point the guy family ask him to cut the shit

So what? That has nothing to do with Russia or his statements that he got info from within the DNC.

Quote

The government was concerned enough they use a private in case if nukeler war line ri communicate with russia to cut the shit

That's been the case since the Cold War. It has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Quote

Also according to the muktiple agencies they found the link from russia to how wikileaks got the links

When i said russia news reported it. Not talking about something vauge. But an actully peice of info that was later revealed in wikileaks. Not just specilatin but found in the emails

As for what assange suggesting hillary has assassins have to do with where assange got the leaks, it shows he willing to bull shit. So when he says russia didnt give him the leaks it might be bullshit. Least possible enough i wont discount 17 agencies on his word alone

Alao the saying they broke into registration databasr not an inconsistencies. Its an old story that didnt get much attention. Becausr of emails, bengazi and trumo grabbing pussy. It was pretty much confirm. And no really argues they didnt do that. Russia did a lot of things, and attempted a lot of attacks. Just some was twarted. Remeber Young Turks back when they were still bashing hillary. Now know some people dont trust the,. But the Young Turks was a source I rember a lot of you saying was a GREAT soruce back when they were bashing Hillary and going for Bernie more. Now there on the neo liberal list because there like "Maybe Hillary doesnt have a team of Assassins". And they werent the only ones who made that report

That communcation method has been there sense the cold wat but this the first time they use it for decades

Let me ask people somethin. Cia coming out with the evidence monday. What would they need to give to make you sau "yea russia probably did it"

When i said russia news reported it. Not talking about something vauge. But an actully peice of info that was later revealed in wikileaks. Not just specilatin but found in the emails

And I showed you instances of stuff that was reported on in the US before it was on wikileaks.

Quote

As for what assange suggesting hillary has assassins have to do with where assange got the leaks, it shows he willing to bull shit. So when he says russia didnt give him the leaks it might be bullshit. Least possible enough i wont discount 17 agencies on his word alone

He said he believes something might have happened but never said for certain. Even if he did bullshit about something, the US government are far bigger bullshitters.

Quote

Cia coming out with the evidence monday. What would they need to give to make you sau "yea russia probably did it"

People wonder why so many aren't taking them seriously? One of the reasons is that they have an ever-increasing list of people to blame for their loss. Let's see who are all responsible for Hillary's loss so far:

Yea it really is unfortunate that the one good thing that could have came from their loss was realizing they needed a man like Sanders, and instead they blame everyone but Hillary, who was the problem the entire time.

The dems learned nothing. And history will repeat again in 2020 if they pull this shit again.

When i said russia news reported it. Not talking about something vauge. But an actully peice of info that was later revealed in wikileaks. Not just specilatin but found in the emails

And I showed you instances of stuff that was reported on in the US before it was on wikileaks.

Quote

As for what assange suggesting hillary has assassins have to do with where assange got the leaks, it shows he willing to bull shit. So when he says russia didnt give him the leaks it might be bullshit. Least possible enough i wont discount 17 agencies on his word alone

He said he believes something might have happened but never said for certain. Even if he did bullshit about something, the US government are far bigger bullshitters.

Quote

Cia coming out with the evidence monday. What would they need to give to make you sau "yea russia probably did it"

Or the defintly did it

Honestly want to know

Ever heard of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident?

He applied something was happen without proof. If said Ap might of molested Children, and I offering 10,000 for info..but Im not SAYING he did it..you would call bullshit. He basicly just floated out there just to mess with someone he hate, the hell with how it affects the family. If Hillary Suggested Bernie was a Russia Spy...and I was like "But AP..she never SAID he was"...you would say Im full of shit. And what it has to do with his russia statment is it goes into his credbilltiy. Same reason Im sure you brough up they were wrong about WMD's in another topic. That not them talking about Russia. But people brought it up because it question the credibilty off goverment agencies.

You point out incidents of speculation. I am talking about info that could only be getting from Wikileaks that was reported before Wikileaks

And again didnt answer the question. What evidence would you need to say "Yea they did it"

Even if you HATE hillary this is bad. Because this is about futurue elections as well. Every group have inside fighting and dealing. We all have Emails where we may not like people to see where where talking shit. People can hate her, and still think this hacking an issue.

Of course no one should be pleased about any foreign power, allied or not, influencing our elections. But so far there hasn't been credible proof (that I'm aware of), and this whole exercise seems like it's being conducted out of bitterness by the Democratic Party. Even if it did happen, it should be dealt with quietly, not in a public hysterical fashion. Trump will be our President and games like this weaken our country.

Yeah they haven't released any hard evidence. Right now the most telling thing is Aussange tiptoeing around saying The leaks originated with Russia especially when he explains multiple times Obama tiptoed around saying Wikileaks got the info directly from Russia.

Of course no one should be pleased about any foreign power, allied or not, influencing our elections. But so far there hasn't been credible proof (that I'm aware of), and this whole exercise seems like it's being conducted out of bitterness by the Democratic Party. Even if it did happen, it should be dealt with quietly, not in a public hysterical fashion. Trump will be our President and games like this weaken our country.

Thing is you kind of HAVE to do publicy as an example to other countries. Since thiis was just a HUGE hack. It actully was a hack on multiple levels. Some stopped, some not. And this help pressure on our future president to put safe guards in place. To solve the promblem you much first acknowledge the promblem exist.

If we DIDNT do anything countries might think this shit has no consquence. So why not do it again and again.

And they did release info. Due to the lanague they use, where the hack orignated from, that they caught them MONTHS ago hacking in voter registration, the methods they used, The hackers themselves being,

It not NO evidence. They actully provide a good deal. And 17 different agnecie. Even the FBI that not exactly was team Hillary during this eletion. That why I ask you the same quesiion I ask AP. They coming out with the report monday. What evidence would they have to give to say "Yea looks like they did it" because it seem to me for some reason people dont want this to be True. Like they cant hold two things in there mind at the same time

Hillary SUCKSAnd hacking by Russia also bad

This is not a logical pardox. Two things can exist at the same time. The fact Trump president..makes it more important. Because Our president reacting to one of the biggest Cyber attacks by going "Yea WHATEVS"

Just imagine if this shit was revese. Imagine if Hillary said they should hack Trump. She won while losing by 3 million votes, and Russia hack RNC. And her reaction was like "Cool Story bro" and went "Russia Awesome. Putin is so cool how he stick it to Trump", then 17 agencies said they did it and she procreed to bad mouth them

The RNC would be FREAKING THE FUCK OUT!!. Hell Trump was calling for revolutions last time Obama won. He be calling for a god damm Gihad right now. And fuck imagine was a republican president at the time..this deffintly would of come out more during the election. DNC response been pretty low key, some sanctions..and kicking out actuly spies

Obama interfering with the internal politics of the UK re Brexit was absolutely fine tho.

How did he hack the brexit polticians..or just publicay made statments. Was registration booth hacked

if he did hack them. It would be a problem. Despite me thinking Brexit was bad. See two things being able to exist at the same time

Show me the evidence of these things being hacked please. Not just a 'russians announce something that was on wikileaks'. Correlation of course does not imply causation.

The actual 'report' mentions nothing about these hacks, just about Putin's 'why' with no evidence of what ,where , when or how. I was actually looking forward to see some evidence the CIA had but...

And as far as I'm aware, didn't Podestra fuck himself by falling for a phising scam?

A phising Scam still a hack. Most hackers count on Human error.

Wel there coming up with some delcassified stuff monday. Again the russian news reporting on it improtant because it was info unique to wikleaks. Now that alone may not be a slam dunk. But you cant really say its no evidence.

The evidence so far even in the classified

Where the hacks orginatedMalware found use in the hacks was also found in other russian operationsthe fact the hackers were RussianThe fact we caught them already hacking in registration databaseRussian lanague errors in the documentsThe hackers being Russian who did this shit beforeThe methodsWherere the date orginal and IP addressesAnd URL shorting tool..that was use in othe russain attacks including attack on anti Russian Journalist

Again can undestnading thinking all this alone not a smoking gun. But it not no evidence either

He did but that's still being "hacked". Is it the looses definition of the word? Yeah. But it still counts as a hack in basic cyber security vernacular. Honestly 99% of "hacking" is just preying on human stupidity because its easier to exploit the user than it is to exploit the software.

Well I guess its not even the looses definition of the word when cooking popcorn in a paper bag is considered a food hack.